Page:The Victoria History of the County of Surrey Volume 3.djvu/615

 ELMBRIDGE HUNDRED

��THAMES DITTON

��in 1530, and this is repeated in a survey of I6O8. 46 Dudley and Joan his wife still held in 1533, when they conveyed it to Lord Wentworth and others, 47 probably trustees for Thomas Duke of Norfolk. From him the king purchased it in order to annex it to the honour of Hampton Court.* 8 During the reign of Elizabeth the manor was leased to various persons, 59 ultimately to Sir John Hill, who had a lease for forty years to expire in 1623.*" After Hill's death his widow, Lady Hill, sold the remainder of her lease to Sir Dudley Carleton, created Baron Carfeton of Imber Court in 1626 and Viscount Dorchester in 1628, to whom the king granted the manor in fee in 1630. He brought lime trees from the Hague to plant in the garden, and also improved the house, where he entertained the king and queen in 1 630." He died in 1632 6> and left the manor in his will to his nephew Sir Dudley Carleton. 6 * The latter, who probably built the present house after designs furnished by Inigo Jones for his uncle, conveyed the estate to Edwin Knipe, merchant of London, who held it in 1 669," and conveyed it to Shem Bridges in 1672.** He died about 171 1, leaving no issue, and was succeeded by his nephew Henry Bridges, who settled the manor with other estates on his niece Anne Bridges on her marriage with Arthur Onslow. 66 The latter, who resided at Imber Court, died in 1768, and in 1784 his son Lord Cranley sold the manor to George Porter. In 1791 Francis Ford purchased the estate, 67 and in 1793 conveyed it to Robert Taylor, 68 after whose decease in 1823 it passed to Sir Charles Sullivan, bart., in right of his wife, the only daughter of Mr. Taylor. 69 In 1861 the house and lands were sold to Charles Corbett, 69 " whose widow held them until her death in 1893. Her heirs and executors sold the house and park in 1899. The house is now again for sale ; the park is used for trotting races. Mr. Julian Corbett, son of the last lord, presented the manorial documents to the Surrey Archaeological Society.

In the reign of Edward III the manor was de- scribed as consisting of ' a capital messuage of no value, 1 20 acres of arable land, half of which may be sown every year, and is then worth 1 101. ; the other half cannot be sown unless it is well tilled, and when left fallow is worth ^i for the pasturage ; 10 acres of meadow, valued at los. from the feast of Pentecost to the gule (that is, the first) of August, at other times of no value because it is in common ; rents of assize of free tenants, 3 14^. o\J., 5 acres of wood valued at ^i los. for the underwood and 3/. \d. for the pasturage.' ' Early in the reign of Charles I a commission was issued for a survey of the manor of Imber. The annual value was rated at .18 6s. 8</., besides some small parcels of woodland worth i 5*. 3</., and 3 acres not valued. 71 When

��Lord Cranley sold the manor it included a capital mansion, other houses, and about 325 acres of land, all tithe-free. 7 ' A farm called Chapel Farm formed part of the Imber Court estate in 1632. " Imworth or Imber water-mill is mentioned in the different surveys of the manor.

In 1553 there were two tenants holding by copy of court roll who owed labour services.

Part of Ditton Common is known as Littleworth Common. The other parts are named after the other manors, Ditton and Weston, but no manor of Littleworth is known.

The church of ST. NICHOLAS con-

CHURCH sists of a chancel with north and south

chapels and north vestry ; a nave with

north and south aisles, a western tower, and a south

porch.

The north wall of the chancel dates from the beginning of the 1 3th century, and part of a late- 1 2th-century pillar piscina is evidence of earlier work. The north chapel was probably a ijth- century addition, and the north arcade of the nave is perhaps late 1 6th-century work. The broad and low tower is apparently of the I 3th century, but all the rest of the church is modern, the nave having been widened on the south side.

The east window of the chancel is modern, of three trefoiled lights with geometrical tracery of late 13th- century design, and is set within the opening of an old window apparently of 1 4th-century date. On the north side of the chancel is a low four-centred arch of 15th-century date continuously moulded with two hollows, opening to the north chapel and designed to contain a tomb and perhaps to serve for the Easter sepulchre. Above this is a small lancet light, c. 1200, with a wide internal splay and semicircular rear arch and an external rebate. To the west is a two-centred arch of one slightly chamfered order, under which stands a fine but mutilated ijth-century monument.

On the south are two bays of modern arcading opening to the south chapel. The chancel arch is of two chamfered orders, the outer continuous, the inner dying into flat responds ; it appears to be of no great age.

The north chapel has on the east a modern two-light window of similar design to the east window of the chancel, and like it set in an old opening. On the north is a modern door to the vestry and on the west the opening to the north aisle. The vestry is entirely modern and has two two-light windows, to east and north, and an external door on the north.

The south chapel is also quite modern and has a three-light window to the east, and two of two lights to the south, all of similar design to the chancel east window. On the west is a plain arch to the aisle.

��56 Surveys and Ct. R. in possession of Surr. Arch. Soc. The lands described in the surveys are in Long Ditton, Thames Ditton, and Moleeey ; but fertincntia are generally mentioned in Godstone, Ling- field, Walkstead, Lagham, and Home. These outlying holdings in the Weald belong to a very ancient state of society (cf. Banstead and Ewell), but no mention of them is found before or after the grant to Robert Smyth.

w Feet of F. Div. Co. Mich, 25 Hen. VIII ; Rccov. R. East. 25 Hen. VIII, rot. 357.

��" Misc. Grants, 27 Hen. VIII.

M Feet of F. Surr. Mich. 10 & II Eliz. ; Pat. 10 Eliz. pt. iii ; Pat. 20 Eliz. pt. i.

60 Land Rev. Misc. Bks. no. 198, fol. 96.

61 Pat. 5 Chas. I, pt. v ; Cal. S. P. Don. 1611-18, pp. 459, 596; Hist. AfSS. Com. Rep. xii, App. pt. i, p. 414 ; in- formation from Mr. Julian Corbett.

89.
 * Chan. Inq. p.m. (Ser. 2), cccclzv,

68 See S.P. Dom. Chas. I, cccxliv, 15. 64 Feet of F. Surr. Hil. 2O&2I Chas. II.

465

��K Ibid. Trin. 24 Chas. II.

66 Ibid Hil. 10 Geo. I.

6 ' Brayley, Hist, of Surr. ii, 415.

68 Feet of F. Surr. East. 34 Geo. III.

69 Brayley, Hisf. of Surr. ii, 416.

69a The manorial rights were apparently sold to the owners of the manors of Weston and East Molesey. (Information from Mr. Julian Corbett.)

7 Chan. Inq. p.m. 17 Edw. Ill, no. 45.

'* Brayley, Hist, of Surr. ii, 415.

7" Ibid. 416.

78 Chan. Inq. p.m. (Ser. 2), ccclxv, 89.

59

�� �